LSAT score and law school performance Forum

[Mr. December]

Does a student's LSAT score correspond to his or her academic performance within law school. Essentially, do the students who got the higher LSAT scores generally get better grades in law school?

[beardown_tho]

they certainly correlate

[Near]

approximately .4 correlation afaik

[taxguy]

People cite all these statistics;however, from what I have seen, there are a LOT of outliers. Not only are there those who don't corelate,but some of these outliers perform substantially different from what would have been predicted by the LSAT in both directions. I personally know two people who scored below 151 on the LSAT and who ended up in the top 5% of their law schools. In fact, one was valedictorian and had among the lowest LSAT score in his class.

On the other hand, I also know several people who scored above 165 and who ended up either flunking out of law school or doing poorly.

Overall, there is probably a mild corelation between LSAT and law school performance. However, it is mild at best and there is a large number of outliers.

[09042014]

People cite all these statistics;however, from what I have seen, there are a LOT of outliers. Not only are there those who don't corelate,but some of these outliers perform substantially different from what would have been predicted by the LSAT in both directions. I personally know two people who scored below 151 on the LSAT and who ended up in the top 5% of their law schools. In fact, one was valedictorian and had among the lowest LSAT score in his class.

On the other hand, I also know several people who scored above 165 and who ended up either flunking out of law school or doing poorly.

Overall, there is probably a mild corelation between LSAT and law school performance. However, it is mild at best and there is a large number of outliers.

LSAT scores at most schools are so similar it doesn't matter. You'll only see it in trends of large groups.

[northwood]

most schools have a scoring band of around 3 points from the 25% to the 75% for the LSAT.

[Rock Chalk]

.

[northwood]

true- but if you are way below the medians, chances are you aren't getting in anyways.

[lawfuture10]

Simply based on personal experience... Currently attending a Low t2 / T3 where the median LSAT is around 158.

Everyone that I have talked to about LSAT and grades that scored 163+ is in the top 15% of our 1L class.

Granted, this is simply anectodal and only refers to 4 or 5 people, I personally believe this is probably typical.

I scored a 166 (8 pts above the median) and am sitting in the top 2-3 students in our entire class after the first semester.

[Wholigan]

.

[BarbellDreams]

In my experience the LSAT has absolutely nothing to do with law school success.

[taxguy]

I forgot to add something: Even the American Bar Association panel on the LSAT has advised that the LSAT become optional and not necessarily required due to its lack of "reliability." Despite the corelation studies done by the LSAC , there is no way the panel would have recommended that the test become optional if the corelation was so great. I also knew one of the panelists who felt that that there was a LOT lacking with the LSAT as to law school performance. From everyone I have met, I agree completely. It may be the most bogus standardized test given among the major entrance exams in the US.

[bk1]

I forgot to add something: Even the American Bar Association panel on the LSAT has advised that the LSAT become optional and not necessarily required due to its lack of "reliability."

Why do you continue to post the same wrong information when you have been discredited dozens of times?

It had nothing to do with reliability and everything to do with the USNWR rankings and promoting diversity.

Source: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011 ... s_use_lsat

[taxguy]

bk187: Bull! I knew one of the panelists. It goes to a LOT more than diversity and rankings. They felt that the test wasn't that reliable. Why don't you read the study.

In fact, one article on this noted," generally have found that such shifts attract more applicants and a more diverse applicant pool without leading to any loss in academic performance"

Read between the lines. More diverse pool with NO LOSS IN PERFORMANCE. Another words, since you need it spelled out, admitting kids with lower LSAT won't affect performance because the exam has questionable corelative significance. Moreover a number of law schools are awaiting the Bar's implementation with this recommendation to make it optional.

By the way, I NEVER, EVER said that there is no corelation. I just said , based on what I have seen, that the corelation is mild.

[bk1]

bk187: Bull! I knew one of the panelists. It goes to a LOT more than diversity and rankings. They felt that the test wasn't that reliable. Why don't you read the study.

Would you like to post a link to the actual study, or even an article that mentions reliability as one of the reasons? I have read several of them and none of them ever mention reliability.

To your general argument: the LSAT has a 0.4 correlation (which is really strong for the social sciences but is in no way even close to foolproof). Your elementary grasp of statistics is appalling. Just because people with low LSATs do well and those with high LSATs struggle doesn't mean that a correlation does not exist. If you need a really brief explanation of it, there is one in this video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7_xHsce57c).

[Curry]

bk187: Bull! I knew one of the panelists. It goes to a LOT more than diversity and rankings. They felt that the test wasn't that reliable. Why don't you read the study.

I know a guy who knows a guy who knows a guy who got a 180 and then placed in the top 1% of his class at HLS therefore the LSAT is a reliable measure.

Do you see why your logic is bad?

[bk1]

To add, two of the committee members said:

Both Polden and Yellen believe that most schools would continue to require the LSAT, in part because it is the most reliable way to measure applicants against each other and make merit-based financial aid decisions.

Source: http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... hbxlogin=1

[Alex-Trof]

bk187: Bull! I knew one of the panelists. It goes to a LOT more than diversity and rankings. They felt that the test wasn't that reliable. Why don't you read the study.

Would you like to post a link to the actual study, or even an article that mentions reliability as one of the reasons? I have read several of them and none of them ever mention reliability.

To your general argument: the LSAT has a 0.33 correlation (which is really strong for the social sciences but is in no way even close to foolproof). Your elementary grasp of statistics is appalling. Just because people with low LSATs do well and those with high LSATs struggle doesn't mean that a correlation does not exist. If you need a really brief explanation of it, there is one in this video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7_xHsce57c).

FTFY

[CanadianWolf]

Just read the study. Seems to focus on diversity & rankings. Reliability as a predictor of law school success was hinted at by the unaccredited Massachusetts School of Law, however.

[bk1]

FTFY

I'll give you the fix on the number, but I'm okay with my "really" considering that it is still pretty high for the social sciences.

[CanadianWolf]

A Virginia law dean mentioned the LSAT correlation as about 0.40 when used to predict performance during the first year of law school, and about a 0.50 correlation when paired with one's undergraduate GPA. This was a videotaped lecture regarding whether the LSAT should be optional (the presenter was a former ABA education chairman) given to AA students attending or accepted to Virginia law.

[Curry]

Just read the study. Seems to focus on diversity & rankings. Reliability as a predictor of law school success was hinted at by the unaccredited Massachusetts School of Law, however.

Therefore it must be the only conclusion of the study

[bk1]

It may be the most bogus standardized test given among the major entrance exams in the US.

I missed this gem. The LSAT is actually probably the best standardized exam for college or graduate school. A lot of which has to do with the ABA's regulation of law schools so that they are so rigidly similar as opposed to undergraduate universities and other graduate schools where there is a lot of divergence and thus the correlation is not nearly as strong for the GMAT/GRE/SAT/MCAT/etc.

[bk1]

A Virginia law dean mentioned the LSAT correlation as about 0.40 when used to predict performance during the first year of law school, and about a 0.50 correlation when paired with one's undergraduate GPA. This was a videotaped lecture regarding whether the LSAT should be optional (the presenter was a former ABA education chairman) given to AA students attending or accepted to Virginia law.

It was Alex Johnson and he might have just been a professor at UVa at the time of his speech (he was a former law school dean as well as former dean of admissions at other places, and he also used to president of LSAC) and the video you are referring to is the YouTube one I linked above.

[CanadianWolf]

@Curry: Why don't you read the study and share your insight ?